The story of the ship Eider was reported by the French newspapers of year 1934, many of which are available on line, on the website https://gallica.bnf.fr of our "Bibliothèque nationale" (National Library). Have a look for instance at L’Ouest-Eclair for year 1934 at https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb32830550k/date1934 and you will read
- on Jan. 30: that ship Eider left for Iceland on January 29 with a crew of 22
- on March 27: a first-page article entitled "No news of "Eider" for 57 days", with details on the ship, including the crew list with actually an Albert Culas
- on March 28: another articled telling that the shipowner has come back from Reykjavik with no news of his three-masted ship
- on April 4: "Still no news of Eider"
- on August 4: that the "Société de secours aux marins français naufragés" sends 14100 francs from Paris, to be shared between the families of the sailors lost with the three-masted ship.
So there was actually a French three-master called Eider, which was not a yacht but a "terre-neuvas", i.e. one of those ships that left for months to go fishing on the banks of Newfoundland or (like in that case) along the coasts of Iceland. Eider was unfortunately not the only one that disappeared without a trace. The remarkable thing about Culas is that his widow apparently believed he could have been stranded in the Pacific! A possible explanation may be that having only heard the name "Hull", she believed that was one of the places bearing the same name in the Atlantic, for there are several of them, first of all the English city of that name on the Humber estuary.
Sorry if that does not demonstrate with a 100% probability that Culas could not be our castaway. I am sure those who do not want AE to have been the one on Niku will better imagine extraordinary ways, for an unfortunate sailor, to make a raft and drift around America (the one or the other way) unnoticed, to the Phoenix islands ...
With best regards
Christophe

Martin...Hi! At any time over the years did Tighar investigate or do research on David's spouse residence in Hawkes Bay, New Zealand. I happened to notice that nothing was mentioned about his spouse, but only his daughter. After, looking this evening I found out that both David Hoodless and his wife Hilda are not buried together. So I wonder...but it would be neat to see if by chance this box is laying in some closet in Hawkes Bay, New Zealand!

https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/172648091/hilda-jane-hoodless

I haven't got a single syllable in my notes on Hilda.

Nor anything in my memory, either.

Searching Misi Utu, I see that she and Hoodless were separated during WWII.  She went to Auckland with their daughter for the duration of the war.

"Time passed. The Germans were not defeated until May 1945, but by then
DWH had been alone too long. He wrote infrequently abrupt letters. Then a
letter arrived that wounded Hilda deeply. He said he had thought matters
over - he was coping satisfactorily alone - he did not think there was any
point in her returning to Fiji and him - ever - he would transmit money
regularly as before but not write again unless there was something important
to be said."

They were reunited after the war.  Hilda went to Fiji to help Hoodless recover from problems caused by a duodenal ulcer.

"Nevertheless DWH did not wish to have his wife bound to cook every meal so
they arranged to have dinner at night at the Grand Pacific Hotel, a stroll awa)
across the park. They had their regular table, which being a table for four
sometimes had other occupants."

"DWH compiled a history of the CMS to which his friend of many years,
Ratu J.L.V. Sukuna, wrote the foreword."

Hoodless died on a visit to Europe with Hilda:

"Pisa, Rome and Florence began well but DWH became increasingly
unwell. At one stage it seemed that he might be unable to return to England
but fortunately they reached Nancy's home in Cambridge and that evening
he was admitted to the Addenbrooke Hospital. Mr Gray, the surgeon told
Hilda that her husband's position was very serious. His duodenal ulcer had
perforated, the duodenum was obstructed by old scarring but no surgery was
possible because he was also in renal failure, a complication of the many years
of a high milk diet. For a week everything was done that could be done but
DWH died on 15 April. Hilda was nevertheless glad they had made the trip
'for it has given him a great deal of overdue pleasure and we have enjoyed so
much together.'"

"The settlement of her affairs dragged on for months. First there was the
question of domicile. From the time of his retirement DWH considered
himself as officially domiciled in Fiji, but by dying in England his estate had
to be proven to the United Kingdom authorities to be that of a citizen of Fiji,
not Great Britain. Hilda also became aware that the mortally ill Sir Henry [Scott]
was not hurrying her business along because, in his weary ill state, he did not
wish to lose the companionship of her visits. Hilda had not the heart to tell
him that she felt tired and none too well herself. She did visit a doctor."

"Within a few weeks Sir Henry Scott was dead and she was able to arrange
her departure. Then, on her arrival in New Zealand, it was obvious that she
had meant what she had written. She arrived in August 1956 a patently ill
woman and died on New Year's Eve. Until the day she died there was one task
Hilda wished to fulfil. She felt she must return to England once more in a
more peaceful frame of mind to see the Stearns and visit the grave they had
arranged for her husband. It was not to be. She kept her tryst with DWH in
another manner."  <the last words of the book>

Martin...Hi! At any time over the years did Tighar investigate or do research on David's spouse residence in Hawkes Bay, New Zealand. I happened to notice that nothing was mentioned about his spouse, but only his daughter. After, looking this evening I found out that both David Hoodless and his wife Hilda are not buried together. So I wonder...but it would be neat to see if by chance this box is laying in some closet in Hawkes Bay, New Zealand!

https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/172648091/hilda-jane-hoodless

This is from TIGHAR Board Chairman Lee Paynter.

Statement from the TIGHAR Board of Directors

At a Special Meeting of the TIGHAR Board of Directors, held on Friday August 31, 2018, Tom King was removed as a director.  Six of eight directors attending, of nine total directors (since Tom chose not to participate) voted for his removal.  Although I personally requested he remain as an active and participating member, Tom withdrew from TIGHAR membership on September 1. 

Tom King had conflicts of interest with respect to his service on the TIGHAR board. In and of itself, conflict of interest is not necessarily disqualifying; but the primary responsibility of a director of any organization is, by law, to further the goals and welfare of the organization. Tom King had shown himself to be unable to subordinate his interests to those of the organization he was pledged to serve. 

Whether it is the confusion his independent Amelia Earhart Archaeology blog and his Earhart mystery-related works of fiction cause; his willingness to cut private deals with media outlets such as National Geographic and the Archaeology Channel; or his refusal to abide by TIGHAR's artifact collection and accession protocols, Tom used his relationship with TIGHAR primarily to serve his own personal and professional agenda.  These and other issues have been the subject of numerous communications to Tom by board members, only to be met with sarcasm and insults.   His participation on the TIGHAR board had become so disruptive as to prevent the board from being able to function at all. 

Many months ago, with the concurrence of a majority of the board, I asked Tom to resign from the board, but not from TIGHAR, for the good of the organization.  He initially agreed, if the board would make clear certain policies with respect to access and care of artifacts and research, and the administration of the Antiquities Management Agreement with Kiribati.  I wrote such a set of statements and resolutions.  They were unacceptable to Tom.  Another board member wrote additional versions.  They were also unacceptable to Tom.  Tom then submitted his own set, which were unacceptable to a majority of board members as being overly and unnecessarily restrictive.  At that point we moved forward with the process of removing Tom as a director, for the original reason of conflicts of interest.

Lee Paynter, Chairman
TIGHAR Board of Directors

I wonder if it just covers Hoodless'es knowledge of the history of the school. Would be interesting to see if it contains anything relevant to the bones.

TIGHAR was in touch with the doctor's daughter back in the late 90s or early 2000s.  When I asked the question about whether we could read the doctor's diary for ourselves, the answer was that she had done so and that she saw nothing relevant to the Earhart case in the diary.  From my Fiji notes: "Hoodless' daughter, Margaret Guthrie, has been asked about the box of bones. She does not know anything about them. They were not in her father's estate. She says she is familiar with his papers and that there are no references in them, either."

In the same way, we were given assurances that there were no relevant records at the Fiji School of Medicine, but we were not allowed to look at anything they had from that era--if they did have anything.  The 2011 Bones Search III had excellent support from the Deputy Chief of Mission for the U.S. in Fiji, and they got to search the anatomy lab, campus, and tunnels.  I'm not sure whether they asked about any records left by Hoodless.

Ran across this article tonight of Dr. Hoodless

Ric.....Its come to my attention that Dr Tom King was asked to step down from Tighar membership from the Tighar board of directors. Can you shed some light on this please....This organization needs his expertise. Thanks

I wonder if it just covers Hoodless'es knowledge of the history of the school. Would be interesting to see if it contains anything relevant to the bones.

Jeff Christmas is a Forum reader but not a TIGHAR member (gotta fix that). He sent me this email:

"I was intrigued by the line of inquiry into a missing French sailor who may have disappeared near Hull.

 I came across some information this morning that a French ship named “Eider” disappeared in 1934.  I didn’t see anything as to its whereabouts when it disappeared, and I have yet to search for additional documentation or related newspaper articles.  I thought I’d send you this link while it was fresh in my mind lest I forget about it.

The part of the database with the following page had 10 ships names Eider.  This is the most likely candidate.

http://www.plimsollshipdata.org/pdffile.php?name=34a0676.pdf

http://www.plimsollshipdata.org/ship.php?ship_id=926&name=Eider

I hope this helps Mr Spading in his inquiries.

Sincerely,

Jeffrey Christmas"

So there WAS a French-registered Eider lost in 1934. She was wooden, 3 masted, 109.8 feet long, 232 tons - possibly a yacht.  If a yacht went missing anywhere in the south pacific chances are it was mentioned in Pacific Islands Monthly.  Now we have a specific date - January 1934.

Has anyone here had opportunity to read through this book?

We have Hoodless' biography "Misi Utu" written by his daughter, but I had never heard of this book.